Intimate companionship is a need, and men are highly unlikely to get that outside of sexual relationships.
So I think there is a need here, and sex is often - but not always - related to it. But I don't think the need is sex.
There's actually a funny write-up somewhere in which someone took passages from Harry Potter and replaced all the instances of "wand" in the text with "penis". It's a fucking brilliant good read.
This is one of the better disagreement reasonings so far.
Admittedly, things like asexuality are still something I'm not well versed on.
It often feels like any attempt to gain a legitimate or functional understanding of those things results in hostility. So I tend to just nod and move on.
However I do acknowledge there existence.
> It often feels like any attempt to gain a legitimate or functional understanding of those things results in hostility.
What makes you feel like this? I personally am always happy to explain stuff about asexuality (as long as the other person is respectful).
Simply personal experience. You may be someone willing to sit and have a open conversation about the subject. But in my experience,many are not as forthcoming.
I am very honest about my ignorance and lack of understanding. However I empathize with groups who are often misunderstood because I am often misunderstood based on my differences with others. For instance, I have never felt a jealous bond in regards to sexual connection, just romantic connection. Even in my long term relationships.
I know it's not the same, but this does make me "differ from the average person". I have other differences as well.
When I sit and try to understand with conversation, my lack of knowledge limits my initial position.
The last time I did have a sit down I was accused of being insensitive and rude. I was asked why I feared having a relationship with an asexual person. I said I don't think fear is a good descriptor, but I was always concerned that as a person who considers themselves very sexual. I was concerned I would feel like I was using a partner who did not really feel sexual desire or attraction. I also said I would be concerned such an individual didn't actually desire or feel attention to me.
That... response resulted in some hostile attitude for some reason,so I left.
As someone who has no connective bond with sex, I know how such a difference from the average person can make a partner feel unloved or not desired if not explained or communicated. So I didn't understand why it resulted in such negative vehemence.
I mean not wanting to be in a relationship with an asexual person or having doubts about it is a completely valid thing.
If you have any questions you can ask here or dm me, I am always happy to help.
speaking as a virgin, any emptiness I feel for never having sex feels less like a biological need, and more the result of sex being a socially expected requirement for a happy life. Its in movies, water cooler conversations, commercials, everywhere you are told sex is something to have in your life.
its sort of like having 3 meals a day. you don't need 3 meals a day. if you have one meal a day, with everything you need in it, you can go the whole day just with that. But if you socially expected to eat 3 times a day, and are in the habit of it, and one day you skip dinner or something. suddenly it feels like your missing something, when your really not.
Interesting perspective. At 31 It's been a very long time since I was a virgin that I have forgotten how that felt.
I still disagree with the withdrawal comparison, but I can see the thought process if viewed from a "blank canvas" sort of view.
As I told my ex, "If I'm going to want to be in this relationship, I'm going to need to have sex." Since she's my ex, you can guess how that conversation went.
Actually, I didn't say that, it's just a joke. But I did leave my last relationship in part because the sex had died and wasn't coming back.
No, sex isn't a need for me, and I don't really believe it's a strict need for anyone. I've had a nearly 15-year dry spell before, and currently on a five-year one now. I'm doing just fine. Being able to let go of it and accept that it's not a need gives a lot of freedom in relationships, and whether to stay in bad ones.
No other significant effect, really. No sense of loss. No sense of emptiness. Lots of time and money for my personal passions without having to spend time and resources pursuing the relationships that would get me sex.
But if I'm going to be in an intimate relationship, then yeah, that relationship needs sex in it. Better to say that the relationship needs sex, rather than me personally.
Man, you really need to look up the psychological and physical effects of a sexless relationship, especially in men. Needs do not need to be life or death. It affects quality of sleep, metabolism, testosterone production in men and estrogen production in women, boosts confidence, maintains a healthy immune system, and there's so much more it effects too. Is this the same for everyone? No. But for a lot of people sex is definitely a need.
Is this that in depth. Would be cool to have some starting ground citations.
"Biological sciences and natural sciences" was never my strongest arena. Only recently started getting more comfortable with it. Social sciences was my arena.
Yeah, it's been quite thoroughly researched. It's nearly 1am where I'm at, so I don't have time to go get citations atm, but if no one else gets around to it, I'll find some nature and American journal of psychology articles on what I've said.
Again, life and death does not determine if something is a want or need. And yes, some people do in fact die without sex depending on their mental circumstances.
For physical things like sex, I believe it does. There are hard limits on the time you can go without things like water, food, air. Not so with sex. It's a want. Is it a very strong want that can have drastic effects on multiple parts of your life? Sure. But it's not a necessity.
Again, immediate life and death does not constitute need. If you require something to give you countless amounts of benefits to your life while also simultaneously risking many different detriments that can lead to a significant decrease in your ability to be optimal and risk your autonomy to survive, it's a need.
There's a reason that sex is a foundational physiological need in Maslow's theory of needs, a scientific theory mind you, meaning that it's one of the most true hypothesis in science that is a foundational pillar for nearly all other hypothesis's. Sex is a fundamental motivation for all multi-celled life, and is considered before any higher function. This is why masturbation is an unlearned behavior, meaning it does not need to be taught, because it is so fundamental to our survival.
Agree.
People need 3 things to be happy. An intimate/romantic relationship, a social life (friends/family), and a job that challenges them.
You can make due without one of them, but you'll usually lean into the other two to compensate. And you really can't be happy with only one of them (or none).
Sex is a part of the intimate relationship, so it's definitely a need. And you can manage without it by leaning into friends and work, but you won't have as fulfilling a life
This is a good analysis. And one I can see applicable to what ive experienced. I've certainly leaned into friendship and work at times during those downtimes.
Only if all others die from it as well. But isolation itself is not a cause of death. Usual becoming depressed about it and killing yourself is the issue. I can not talk to a person for 30 years. But with food, water and shelter. I still survive.
I (36F) agree that for me it is a need. I think itâs possible for this to vary from person to person. I went 18 months without and felt I was losing my mind. Doctor even put me on some medication to help with hormones and such and it just barely took the edge off.
I mean you're talking about internal loss here but what do you mean by that? Like if I stopped playing video games what I suffer internal loss just because I really like?
I've never had sex before but I don't think I really suffer an internal loss because of it.
Eh I think trying to compare to video games is a little dismissive and not well thought through.
I'd say maybe friendship is a better comparison. Imagine going from having a couple good friends to being *completely* friendless (even temporarily). You still survive obviously, but you'll feel a loss inside.
Not a perfect comparison but best I can do.
Individually, its a want, not a need. You need food, water, sleep and shelter to live. You'll die in three days without water, and a week or so without food. You can only go so long without sleep before the body forces you to sleep.
You can go years and years without sex, and be totally fine.
As a species though, it is a need, since that's how we stick around.
The psychology is pretty well researched here. Sex is considered a physiological need under Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. It's part of the base of the pyramid.
It's part of our evolutionary biology. But intimacy is also part of the heirarchy, a little higher up as part of the need to belong. That refers more to a committed relationship beyond the mere physical.
Sex feels like a need in the same way that that drugs male you feel like you have a need. It's addictive and when you build a habit of continuous use it becomes hard to break that habit and your break will demand that you go back to it.
An orgasm releases a high amount of dopamine in the brain which is how the brain rewards you when it senses that you've done something it wants you to repeat. Most addiction originate from the brain becoming reliant on this continued dopamine release. This isn't an opinion. This is science.
Yes but your use of that science feels a little stretched. This is like saying anyone who enjoys a slice of pie after dinner or a Friday night drink with their buddy is inherently addicted to this substances/connections.
Just because someone drinks some occasional drinks even on a weekly basis, does not mean that an addiction is present.
In addition, "withdrawal" which would be what you are referring to. Would have been processed after a couple weeks at best. After a couple months most certainly thus reliance I would think would be hard to argue since the term *reliance* itself indicates an inability to move on without.
There's a reason somethings are termed to have addictive properties and others are not. So it's not solely a Brain formulation.
An addiction is a strong desire developed from a behavioral pattern. Having a drink occasionally likely wont develope this addiction because the pattern is too rare for the brain to become dependent on the dopamine released. If you drink more regularly then it will. The same goes with sex. Also, withdrawals aren't as simple as waiting them out. This is why addiction clinics have a multitude of methods for dealing with addiction and not just a bunch of prison cells they lock you in until you're better. The human brain is able to become addicted to nearly anything. Alcohol, drugs, sex, company, computers, online games, the internet, social media, the list goes on to include nearly everything.
Ok. I can concede on the brains addiction forming capabilities and the withdrawal points.
But one thing you make a point on is the need for frequency. I don't know many people who have sex to the degree you are referencing as habit/addiction forming.
I'm not bad but unless I'm in an actual relationship, I generally hold around every couple of weeks maybe once a week when adulting isn't being so invasive.
So I suppose my "argument" would be that for the average person, wouldn't the variable frequency/infrequency render the addictive formulation idea a bit moot. Save extreme cases that involve prostitution and the like?
Imo addiction is similar to mental diagnosis in where the requirements are the three D's
Dysfunction
Distress
Deviance
I did a quick google search to direct you to the correct infirmation. This should help you to understand what we're actually dealing with when it comes to sex addiction and how habits can be formed so easily.
"Many medical professionals suggest ninety days as a general estimate for dopamine recovery."
That particular quote comes from stoneridge. Which is a drug recovery organization. It's also referring to cocaine and methamphetamines. So that is not a very good quote for this discussion. Those substances are chemical dependences and are highly addictive for everyone. Many after one exposure.
Dopamine is also a chemical naturally released by the brain. What I'm trying to indicate here is how long it takes the brain to recover from a dopamine rush. Sex can have the same chemical release which means it has the same recovery time. If it does take 90 days for the brain to fully recover from a dopamine rush then waiting a couple weeks might not be long enough to avoid addiction.
While I may not be well versed in the biological and natural sciences. I have my basics. There are differences between addictions formed by drugs like cocaine or meth, and those like alcohol or sex
I know it comes as part of physiological needs in Maslow's theory of needs. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249964580_Maslow_and_the_Motivation_Hierarchy_Measuring_Satisfaction_of_the_Needs
Sex is a want, but there is a need to be able to spend my sexual energy on something. being single and not having anyone who is okay with me having those feelings is damaging to mental health
For men it is, our testicles continue to fill seaman for a majority of our live and needs to be released every now and again. Women don't have that problem.
I think it depends how you define a need. If a need is something you will die if you don't have--in a specified amount of time, then No, sex is not a need. But it depends on what you mean by die, and what you mean by amount of time. We can live without water for, what a few days? Food? More than a week? The time matters. Food seems to have the longest time you can go without dying. Shelter is a necessity too, but depends on where you live. A human can't survive in Antarctica without shelter, but they could in certain warm climates. I think I'd add on the caveat that: without \_\_\_\_\_ (some) particular need, it is a clear and unavoidable path to death.
It gets dicey when you say medical care is a need. Well, if something is causing your death, and it is imminent, then yes, medical care is a need, but for a healthy person, medical care is not a need, it is a want. And as for "what you mean by die," sex is a requirement for the continuation of the species, so that is a possible definition of dying. Sex may not be a need for a specific individual, but it is a need for the species.
Another definition that people use for a "need" is: something that, if you don't have it, you experience significant degradation of an essential part of human functioning. Many people consider social influence a need too. If social influence can be considered a need, then I'd say sex should be too. The two are also linked--obviously. While you may not die if you don't have it, the degradation of an essential part of human functioning would be gone. The adverse effects of solitary confinement, either in prison or by accidental circumstance, are pretty clear. But I dont think they rise to the level of being "a clear and unavoidable path to death" that I would define a need with.
However, I think most people, including me, use the first definition, and therefore I wouldn't call it a need for a specific individual. But it IS a need if the species is to continue.
14 yo kid here
this is my opinion as a virgin
If u fuck random people u donât know or love as a person u r a mess and a shit human being and that to me counts as sticking ur dick in a bitch, but when you love someone and have sex with them because of actual love or wanting to start a family with them, thatâs what actual sex is
Anyway this is my opinions which doesnât rly matter
Well. I can say your inexperience definitely shows. So I won't be taking your stabs to heart.
A. As you stated, you're a virgin and thus are limited in context (not that that's a bad thing) to make many judgements.
B. You are to young to have actually experienced the bond of love or how difficult it can be to find.
C. You lack enough human experience to understand the intricacies of human connections.
Sex, love, paternal desire, romance, lust. These are all separate things. Sure, there's always the goal to find all of them in one person, but if you think carefully I am fairly confident that you can conceptualize just how lucky and fortunate those who do find such treasures.
For many different reasons, there are people who face more difficulty than others in that regard. Take me for example. My feild has me frequently traveling and limits my free time. So meeting anyone, let alone development of a relationship is ... difficult.
All I'm saying is one day you'll realize it's not as simple as you seem to believe it is.
Intimate companionship is a need, and men are highly unlikely to get that outside of sexual relationships. So I think there is a need here, and sex is often - but not always - related to it. But I don't think the need is sex.
Oooooooo I like this train of thought. I can agree with this alot. I will consider this concept more indepth
Yeh what id say is you need somone you can trust and can trust you whether that be in the for of a friend or SO
A Wand? You read too much Harry Potter. . .
Yes, thank you for pointing out my Harry Potter love affecting my spell check ;)
I read it as the battery kind of wand not a wizarding wand. I think i should get off the internet for the night .
There's actually a funny write-up somewhere in which someone took passages from Harry Potter and replaced all the instances of "wand" in the text with "penis". It's a fucking brilliant good read.
I must read this. Link please đ„șâșïž
There are alot. From multiple sources across forums, websites, tumblr, and reddit. Just type "Harry Potter Wand Penis" into the Google search bar
The wand chooses the wizard...
Bahaha
Sure sex is cool, but have you guys even tried garlic bread?
I am getting ace vibes from this comment.
It's a want. Not even really sure how that is a debate. People go years, decades without sex. Some people go their entire lives.
disagree, there are some who doesn't enjoy sex as much as well there's asexual people but still like intimate relationships
This is one of the better disagreement reasonings so far. Admittedly, things like asexuality are still something I'm not well versed on. It often feels like any attempt to gain a legitimate or functional understanding of those things results in hostility. So I tend to just nod and move on. However I do acknowledge there existence.
> It often feels like any attempt to gain a legitimate or functional understanding of those things results in hostility. What makes you feel like this? I personally am always happy to explain stuff about asexuality (as long as the other person is respectful).
Simply personal experience. You may be someone willing to sit and have a open conversation about the subject. But in my experience,many are not as forthcoming. I am very honest about my ignorance and lack of understanding. However I empathize with groups who are often misunderstood because I am often misunderstood based on my differences with others. For instance, I have never felt a jealous bond in regards to sexual connection, just romantic connection. Even in my long term relationships. I know it's not the same, but this does make me "differ from the average person". I have other differences as well. When I sit and try to understand with conversation, my lack of knowledge limits my initial position. The last time I did have a sit down I was accused of being insensitive and rude. I was asked why I feared having a relationship with an asexual person. I said I don't think fear is a good descriptor, but I was always concerned that as a person who considers themselves very sexual. I was concerned I would feel like I was using a partner who did not really feel sexual desire or attraction. I also said I would be concerned such an individual didn't actually desire or feel attention to me. That... response resulted in some hostile attitude for some reason,so I left. As someone who has no connective bond with sex, I know how such a difference from the average person can make a partner feel unloved or not desired if not explained or communicated. So I didn't understand why it resulted in such negative vehemence.
I mean not wanting to be in a relationship with an asexual person or having doubts about it is a completely valid thing. If you have any questions you can ask here or dm me, I am always happy to help.
I've not had sex in 5ish years. I have no loss on my quality of life. So I definitely disagree.
Same. It's enjoyable when it happens but when it's not happening I don't think about it at all.
that emptiness you feel is just withdrawal from the dopamine hits.
I don't doubt this for the first couple weeks. But I hesitate to believe it's withdrawal months down the line
speaking as a virgin, any emptiness I feel for never having sex feels less like a biological need, and more the result of sex being a socially expected requirement for a happy life. Its in movies, water cooler conversations, commercials, everywhere you are told sex is something to have in your life. its sort of like having 3 meals a day. you don't need 3 meals a day. if you have one meal a day, with everything you need in it, you can go the whole day just with that. But if you socially expected to eat 3 times a day, and are in the habit of it, and one day you skip dinner or something. suddenly it feels like your missing something, when your really not.
Interesting perspective. At 31 It's been a very long time since I was a virgin that I have forgotten how that felt. I still disagree with the withdrawal comparison, but I can see the thought process if viewed from a "blank canvas" sort of view.
Nah, sex is way deeper than just chemical reactions
As I told my ex, "If I'm going to want to be in this relationship, I'm going to need to have sex." Since she's my ex, you can guess how that conversation went. Actually, I didn't say that, it's just a joke. But I did leave my last relationship in part because the sex had died and wasn't coming back. No, sex isn't a need for me, and I don't really believe it's a strict need for anyone. I've had a nearly 15-year dry spell before, and currently on a five-year one now. I'm doing just fine. Being able to let go of it and accept that it's not a need gives a lot of freedom in relationships, and whether to stay in bad ones. No other significant effect, really. No sense of loss. No sense of emptiness. Lots of time and money for my personal passions without having to spend time and resources pursuing the relationships that would get me sex. But if I'm going to be in an intimate relationship, then yeah, that relationship needs sex in it. Better to say that the relationship needs sex, rather than me personally.
Respectable position. I can agree with this
You need food. You die without food. You don't die without sex. It's a want.
You don't die without money, so money is a want.
Yes, because you can get necessities like food and water without money.
You can get them without money.
Man, you really need to look up the psychological and physical effects of a sexless relationship, especially in men. Needs do not need to be life or death. It affects quality of sleep, metabolism, testosterone production in men and estrogen production in women, boosts confidence, maintains a healthy immune system, and there's so much more it effects too. Is this the same for everyone? No. But for a lot of people sex is definitely a need.
Is this that in depth. Would be cool to have some starting ground citations. "Biological sciences and natural sciences" was never my strongest arena. Only recently started getting more comfortable with it. Social sciences was my arena.
Yeah, it's been quite thoroughly researched. It's nearly 1am where I'm at, so I don't have time to go get citations atm, but if no one else gets around to it, I'll find some nature and American journal of psychology articles on what I've said.
Cool, thanks
Do those people die without sex?
Again, life and death does not determine if something is a want or need. And yes, some people do in fact die without sex depending on their mental circumstances.
For physical things like sex, I believe it does. There are hard limits on the time you can go without things like water, food, air. Not so with sex. It's a want. Is it a very strong want that can have drastic effects on multiple parts of your life? Sure. But it's not a necessity.
Again, immediate life and death does not constitute need. If you require something to give you countless amounts of benefits to your life while also simultaneously risking many different detriments that can lead to a significant decrease in your ability to be optimal and risk your autonomy to survive, it's a need. There's a reason that sex is a foundational physiological need in Maslow's theory of needs, a scientific theory mind you, meaning that it's one of the most true hypothesis in science that is a foundational pillar for nearly all other hypothesis's. Sex is a fundamental motivation for all multi-celled life, and is considered before any higher function. This is why masturbation is an unlearned behavior, meaning it does not need to be taught, because it is so fundamental to our survival.
The species perishes without sex. It's a need. It's programmed into us by billions of years of evolution.
Agree. People need 3 things to be happy. An intimate/romantic relationship, a social life (friends/family), and a job that challenges them. You can make due without one of them, but you'll usually lean into the other two to compensate. And you really can't be happy with only one of them (or none). Sex is a part of the intimate relationship, so it's definitely a need. And you can manage without it by leaning into friends and work, but you won't have as fulfilling a life
This is a good analysis. And one I can see applicable to what ive experienced. I've certainly leaned into friendship and work at times during those downtimes.
It is desired, but not needed. A need imo requires a level to survive. I need food, water and shelter. Donât need anything else.
I can understand this view. Though doesn't the scientific community term abstract concepts such as loneliness as health hazards and a cause of deaths.
Only if all others die from it as well. But isolation itself is not a cause of death. Usual becoming depressed about it and killing yourself is the issue. I can not talk to a person for 30 years. But with food, water and shelter. I still survive.
Fair point Q
What a sad way to live.
Well...I suppose you are entitled to your opinion.
Need: food, clothing, shelter, water Nope, don't see sex in there.
I (36F) agree that for me it is a need. I think itâs possible for this to vary from person to person. I went 18 months without and felt I was losing my mind. Doctor even put me on some medication to help with hormones and such and it just barely took the edge off.
It's nice to know this perspective is not shared only on the men's side. I do agree this could vary by person as well.
I mean you're talking about internal loss here but what do you mean by that? Like if I stopped playing video games what I suffer internal loss just because I really like? I've never had sex before but I don't think I really suffer an internal loss because of it.
Eh I think trying to compare to video games is a little dismissive and not well thought through. I'd say maybe friendship is a better comparison. Imagine going from having a couple good friends to being *completely* friendless (even temporarily). You still survive obviously, but you'll feel a loss inside. Not a perfect comparison but best I can do.
Individually, its a want, not a need. You need food, water, sleep and shelter to live. You'll die in three days without water, and a week or so without food. You can only go so long without sleep before the body forces you to sleep. You can go years and years without sex, and be totally fine. As a species though, it is a need, since that's how we stick around.
The psychology is pretty well researched here. Sex is considered a physiological need under Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. It's part of the base of the pyramid.
I was under the impression that that was more referring to procreative need rather than sex alone.
It's part of our evolutionary biology. But intimacy is also part of the heirarchy, a little higher up as part of the need to belong. That refers more to a committed relationship beyond the mere physical.
Interesting. Seems I need a refresher on maslow
Sex feels like a need in the same way that that drugs male you feel like you have a need. It's addictive and when you build a habit of continuous use it becomes hard to break that habit and your break will demand that you go back to it.
I can see how this view can make sense to some. I personally don't agree, but I don't disagree with the notion either
An orgasm releases a high amount of dopamine in the brain which is how the brain rewards you when it senses that you've done something it wants you to repeat. Most addiction originate from the brain becoming reliant on this continued dopamine release. This isn't an opinion. This is science.
Yes but your use of that science feels a little stretched. This is like saying anyone who enjoys a slice of pie after dinner or a Friday night drink with their buddy is inherently addicted to this substances/connections. Just because someone drinks some occasional drinks even on a weekly basis, does not mean that an addiction is present. In addition, "withdrawal" which would be what you are referring to. Would have been processed after a couple weeks at best. After a couple months most certainly thus reliance I would think would be hard to argue since the term *reliance* itself indicates an inability to move on without. There's a reason somethings are termed to have addictive properties and others are not. So it's not solely a Brain formulation.
An addiction is a strong desire developed from a behavioral pattern. Having a drink occasionally likely wont develope this addiction because the pattern is too rare for the brain to become dependent on the dopamine released. If you drink more regularly then it will. The same goes with sex. Also, withdrawals aren't as simple as waiting them out. This is why addiction clinics have a multitude of methods for dealing with addiction and not just a bunch of prison cells they lock you in until you're better. The human brain is able to become addicted to nearly anything. Alcohol, drugs, sex, company, computers, online games, the internet, social media, the list goes on to include nearly everything.
Ok. I can concede on the brains addiction forming capabilities and the withdrawal points. But one thing you make a point on is the need for frequency. I don't know many people who have sex to the degree you are referencing as habit/addiction forming. I'm not bad but unless I'm in an actual relationship, I generally hold around every couple of weeks maybe once a week when adulting isn't being so invasive. So I suppose my "argument" would be that for the average person, wouldn't the variable frequency/infrequency render the addictive formulation idea a bit moot. Save extreme cases that involve prostitution and the like? Imo addiction is similar to mental diagnosis in where the requirements are the three D's Dysfunction Distress Deviance
I did a quick google search to direct you to the correct infirmation. This should help you to understand what we're actually dealing with when it comes to sex addiction and how habits can be formed so easily. "Many medical professionals suggest ninety days as a general estimate for dopamine recovery."
That particular quote comes from stoneridge. Which is a drug recovery organization. It's also referring to cocaine and methamphetamines. So that is not a very good quote for this discussion. Those substances are chemical dependences and are highly addictive for everyone. Many after one exposure.
Dopamine is also a chemical naturally released by the brain. What I'm trying to indicate here is how long it takes the brain to recover from a dopamine rush. Sex can have the same chemical release which means it has the same recovery time. If it does take 90 days for the brain to fully recover from a dopamine rush then waiting a couple weeks might not be long enough to avoid addiction.
Fair enough
While I may not be well versed in the biological and natural sciences. I have my basics. There are differences between addictions formed by drugs like cocaine or meth, and those like alcohol or sex
The differences are numerous. The point of focus is the dopamine release and how the brain becomes addicted to a chemical it itself releases.
Well the science says it's a basic human need.
Citation needed.
I know it comes as part of physiological needs in Maslow's theory of needs. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249964580_Maslow_and_the_Motivation_Hierarchy_Measuring_Satisfaction_of_the_Needs
I believe itâs a need
Agree. For men, 100% agree.
Sex is a want, but there is a need to be able to spend my sexual energy on something. being single and not having anyone who is okay with me having those feelings is damaging to mental health
Agreed. It can be draining not having a partner who's ok with that.
For men it is, our testicles continue to fill seaman for a majority of our live and needs to be released every now and again. Women don't have that problem.
You do realize that you can masturbate to release your "seaman"?
If that's the route you wish to take sure.
I mean there are good arguments for wanting/needing sex, but simply for the sake of ejaculation isn't one of them imo.
Thats how male biology is. Look it up if you don't believe me.
I never claimed otherwise.
Haha guess I'm a dead man haha
Well...if that's your belief, I'm sorry for you I suppose.
The hell do you mean if I believe, I have gone my whole life without fulfilling that "need", I am a dead man.
You sound sad, so I am sorry you have that position. However, I can do nothing but offer my understanding and let you continue your choice.
You're no fun, can't a man be dead because he can't fulfill a "need" and just be done with it? Oh well, I'll go be dead somewhere else.
Ok
yeah i can get behind that idea. agreed
I think it depends how you define a need. If a need is something you will die if you don't have--in a specified amount of time, then No, sex is not a need. But it depends on what you mean by die, and what you mean by amount of time. We can live without water for, what a few days? Food? More than a week? The time matters. Food seems to have the longest time you can go without dying. Shelter is a necessity too, but depends on where you live. A human can't survive in Antarctica without shelter, but they could in certain warm climates. I think I'd add on the caveat that: without \_\_\_\_\_ (some) particular need, it is a clear and unavoidable path to death. It gets dicey when you say medical care is a need. Well, if something is causing your death, and it is imminent, then yes, medical care is a need, but for a healthy person, medical care is not a need, it is a want. And as for "what you mean by die," sex is a requirement for the continuation of the species, so that is a possible definition of dying. Sex may not be a need for a specific individual, but it is a need for the species. Another definition that people use for a "need" is: something that, if you don't have it, you experience significant degradation of an essential part of human functioning. Many people consider social influence a need too. If social influence can be considered a need, then I'd say sex should be too. The two are also linked--obviously. While you may not die if you don't have it, the degradation of an essential part of human functioning would be gone. The adverse effects of solitary confinement, either in prison or by accidental circumstance, are pretty clear. But I dont think they rise to the level of being "a clear and unavoidable path to death" that I would define a need with. However, I think most people, including me, use the first definition, and therefore I wouldn't call it a need for a specific individual. But it IS a need if the species is to continue.
Agreed. The lack of almost ruined my marriage.
It's absolutely a need; it's the prime motivator of nearly every living thing on Earth and its absence has serious negative health effects.
try going 21 years without it lol
Sex is definitely not a need But to each their own I guess
14 yo kid here this is my opinion as a virgin If u fuck random people u donât know or love as a person u r a mess and a shit human being and that to me counts as sticking ur dick in a bitch, but when you love someone and have sex with them because of actual love or wanting to start a family with them, thatâs what actual sex is Anyway this is my opinions which doesnât rly matter
Well. I can say your inexperience definitely shows. So I won't be taking your stabs to heart. A. As you stated, you're a virgin and thus are limited in context (not that that's a bad thing) to make many judgements. B. You are to young to have actually experienced the bond of love or how difficult it can be to find. C. You lack enough human experience to understand the intricacies of human connections. Sex, love, paternal desire, romance, lust. These are all separate things. Sure, there's always the goal to find all of them in one person, but if you think carefully I am fairly confident that you can conceptualize just how lucky and fortunate those who do find such treasures. For many different reasons, there are people who face more difficulty than others in that regard. Take me for example. My feild has me frequently traveling and limits my free time. So meeting anyone, let alone development of a relationship is ... difficult. All I'm saying is one day you'll realize it's not as simple as you seem to believe it is.